House: Duterte impeach raps to follow Marcos case standards
A House official said the impeachment complaints against Vice President Sara Duterte will face the same constitutional standards used in the case of President Marcos who escaped being impeached on Tuesday when 284 House lawmakers voted to declare the two complaints against him insufficient in substance.
Batangas Rep. Gerville Luistro, House justice committee chair, said on Wednesday that the complaints against Duterte have been submitted to the office of Speaker Faustino Dy III, but the panel cannot yet take jurisdiction as these have not been referred by the House plenary.
On Tuesday, House Secretary General Cheloy Velicaria-Garafil said she transmitted to Dy the third complaint filed by members of the clergy and legal practitioners on Monday night.
Under House impeachment rules, the Speaker has 10 session days to include the impeachment complaints in the order of business, after which the plenary has three session days to refer them to the justice committee.
Central issue
Luistro warned that failure to act within the prescribed period—or by March 2—could nullify the complaints following the Supreme Court’s ruling on the timing of the process.
This could itself become a central issue once deliberations begin, she said, citing the high tribunal’s different pronouncements on the one-year ban rule.
“Now we have to decide first when are we really allowed to file the second impeachment. Is it Feb. 6 as expressed in the original decision of July 25, 2025 or is it Jan. 15, 2026 as implied in the resolution of Jan. 28, 2026?” Luistro said.
“I am actually anticipating a very passionate debate on that when we start on the deliberation before the justice committee,” she added.
Three impeachment complaints have been filed against Duterte. The first two complaints, filed separately by members of the Makabayan bloc and by a coalition of civil society groups and lawyers, accuse her of betrayal of public trust and culpable violation of the Constitution in connection with the alleged misuse and mishandling of confidential funds.
The third complaint raised similar accusations, including alleged violations of transparency and accountability requirements and conduct unbecoming of a high public officer, mainly over the use of confidential funds and related actions while in office.
The charges appear to be the same, except for the inclusion of the accusations of Duterte’s former aide, Ramil Madriaga, in a complaint he filed before the Ombudsman.
